February 12, 2008

The Final Mission, Part III

Humvee Dubat Fallujah.jpg

ANBAR PROVINCE, IRAQ

Posted by Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 12:39 AM
Comments
Another brilliant read. Thanks, Mr. Totten.
On the topic of anti-American movies: I think if they made a movie based on the stuff you write, it would fare much better. It could include the mistakes and the corruption, but it should feature the human element, the bond between soldiers. They could include the chaos that they love so much in war movies, but if they weren't so obsessed with magnifying the bad things about Iraq, they could sway public opinion and maybe give our troops more time to finish the mission over there. At least the box-office flops show that Americans aren't ready to put down real American dollars to have their own country insulted and their soldiers demonized.
Posted by: James at February 12, 2008 1:26 am
Good stuff, as usual.
I am not a fan of the war and was against it before it begain. However, those who claim our troops are nothing but thugs randomly shooting have never served with nor know much about our troops.
We have the best trained troops in the world doing the hardest job in the world. No matter what you think about the war I think one must admit they have done a great job under terrible circumstances.
For me my opposition to the war has never been about the actions of our troops, but about the facts that led us into the war and the effects this war will have on the region.
The actions and bravery of our troops has been about the only bright spot in this conflict.
Posted by: Marc at February 12, 2008 6:20 am
The Iraqi men in the pictures look very young. What's the average age of the police over there? Perhaps there's not enough older cops to get the younger ones in line.
Those anti-american movies will be popular overseas, I'll wager. The Turks actually produced a movie that had American troops harvesting the organs of dead Iraqis.
Posted by: Boojum at February 12, 2008 6:30 am
"An Iraqi Police truck riddled with bullet holes."
I registered just to muse about the picture of the bullet holes in the truck. No bigger point here really. Just looks like the truck has a story all its own, which is almost funny.
At first glance, the assumption is this U.S. provided truck has been in a serious fire fight. But then, on second glance, note the odd pattern of the bullet hole, level groupings high and low on the door. Combined with Totten's lament of the all-to-common accidental discharge of Iraqi Police rifles, I wonder if those are actually exit holes.
It could be the truck got strafed (or whatever), but imagine, for a moment, an IP sitting in the in the truck with his rifle resting across his lap, finger on the trigger, and pointed towards the door. A few bumpy roads and accidental discharges later -- we get the top line of holes. Then imagine an IP sort of wedging his rifle between the door and seat, muzzle pointed downward, making for an improvised gun rack, but the IP maintains his absentminded habit of keeping his finger on the trigger. Four accidental squeezes later -- we get the bottom grouping of bullet holes.
Plus, the paint chipping looks more consistent with and exit hole to my entirely untrained eye. I suppose, if this were the case, it lends to Totten's idea that, now, Iraqi incompetence is becoming more dangerous than the insurgency. Anyway, just thought I'd share my thought.
Amazing post as always Totten. You continue to inspire and awe.
Yo
Posted by: yojimbo at February 12, 2008 11:35 am
Boojum: What's the average age of the police over there?
30, maybe.
yojimbo: I wonder if those are actually exit holes.
That's funny. Hadn't thought of that. There are no holes anywhere in that truck except in the doors. Could be because insurgents shot at the doors with good aim trying to kill the police inside...but the insurgents can't aim for shit.
I don't know how to tell an exit hole from an entrance hole, though. Does anyone around here know?
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 12:03 pm
Michael;
I noticed those holes (only the top three in the front door) in a photo in a previous article, and was going to ask if they were bullet holes, but since they didn't appear very random, I figured they probably weren't.
Posted by: Tom in Texas at February 12, 2008 12:39 pm
Posted by: Tom in Texas at February 12, 2008 12:46 pm
If the hole opens into the truck, entry.
If it opens outside of the truck, exit.
Also entry holes tend to be smaller than exit. Provided the bullet wasn't tumbling when it hit the target. Having never seen a 7.62 entry hole, those in the truck still look rather large to be entering the truck.
Posted by: Kevin at February 12, 2008 1:13 pm
There is certainly a preconceived notion about the American military throughout the world. In the South Korean flim "The Host" Arrogant American officals in Korea order hapless Koreans to dump chemicals down the sink, which gives birth to a monster that wrecks havoc.
I take most anti war sentiments from abroad (espeically Asia) with a grain of salt. Many prominent anti Iraq voices in Korea are either radical conservatives or nationalists in their own nations, or just netizens who are spoon fed baseless anti American conspiracy theories.
I lived in the United States for almost 20 years now. I've lived in their company. I can only laugh at the stuff many Asians have made up about America, and their preconceived notions about this country or Iraq. Some Koreans buy into romantic notions of Al Qaeda as independence fighters.
Posted by: lee at February 12, 2008 1:15 pm
They will point their weapons at their American allies and teachers. They will point their weapons at their fellow Iraqi Police officers. They will point their weapons at you if you ever go to Iraq.
They're like that in Jordan too. During every interaction with border police and roadside cops (who pulled taxis over for some unspecified reason) there were always guns pointed in my face. Then there was the Lebanese soldier who dropped his gun. At least his friends knew that was bad, and joked about it.
Sustained contact with the
Posted by: maryatexitzero at February 12, 2008 1:25 pm
Tom,
The regularity of the holes struck me as well, but that doesn't mean that they aren't bullet holes. I've seen a lot more AK-47's in Iraq than drills. Since Michael was bringing up the cavalier attitude of many Iraqi's towards negligent weapons discharge, I do not think it impossible that the holes are deliberate shots.
The best muzzle discipline I saw in Iraq was by a revolutionary communist Kurd guard. I disliked his politics, but loved his professionalism.
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 12, 2008 1:33 pm
Totten: "That's funny."
Glad to know I got a laugh out you Totten.
Tom in Texas: "I figured they probably weren't."
Since I spun this little yarn about the bullet holes, I went checked out the photo Tom in Texas mentioned in the earlier post. The bullet holes are virtually the same, but it's a different truck! The truck in this post is #160. In Part 1 its truck # is partial but ends in 22. As much as I would like to think my theory holds water (cough), I'm thinking that these are not bullet holes at all. The pattern repeats almost exactly on each door (back and front door on both trucks). I'm guessing they are bolt holes for some sort of up-armor add on. Thoughts?
What I think is amazing is that, if this is the case, Totten's mild photo caption error is reflective of the down turn in violence. A couple of rusty holes in an IP truck are now more often than not just that -- rusty holes. I had fun with my theory though.
Yo
Posted by: yojimbo at February 12, 2008 1:40 pm
Just freaking fantastic work. Thank you Michael.
Posted by: Ray robison at February 12, 2008 2:10 pm
yojimbo: The bullet holes are virtually the same, but it's a different truck!
You're right. I hadn't noticed. Now I have no idea what those holes are. Maybe armor was bolted to the doors and is no longer necessary?
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 3:22 pm
I deleted the caption since it was apparently wrong.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 3:23 pm
Michael, great work. I'd like to ask if you know how the Iraq War and US soldiers are portrayed on Arabic TV? The Iraqis and the people in Anbar definetly know that the Americans are there to help. Do the Iraqis stick up for the Americans?
Posted by: PeteDawg at February 12, 2008 4:03 pm
Pete, it depends on the channel. Al Arabiya is better than Al Jazeera. But I don't follow either all that much, so I'm really not the best person to ask.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 4:12 pm
Hi Michael. I don't know if it's because you linked to George Packer's piece or what (I love his writing also, and loved the Assassin
Posted by: scottmoshen at February 12, 2008 4:39 pm
Regarding your comment "Military justice, I suspect, is more in line with the values of domestic liberals and Democrats than many probably realize"
Wrong. Military values and humane treatment of detainees is a conservative value.
(US) Liberals in the US would have bail for prisoners, miranda right demands, warrants from a judge before each attack on the enemy, second-guessing of every move, etc. etc.
The military is the last great institution in the US which liberals do not yet control. With luck it will remain that way for a long time.
While I enjoy your writing, and have contributed $ in support of your efforts, I've noticed your understanding of politics is quite naive.
Posted by: Max at February 12, 2008 4:47 pm
Max: Wrong. Military values and humane treatment of detainees is a conservative value.
I didn't say or even suggest otherwise. I didn't bring up conservative values one way or the other.
Many liberals think the military operates with Jack Bauer rules of engagement, that Abu Ghraib was typical. And they're wrong. That was my point.
I can't make that point with liberals as easily by saying "humane treatment is a conservative value" because they have convinced themselves otherwise. And I am not trying to be partisan, I'm trying to explain what is happening in Iraq. That is my job. Arguing for conservative values is not.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 5:30 pm
That, by the way, is why I put "liberal" in quotation marks.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 5:31 pm
Michael
What caught my eye was the reference to "domestic liberals and Democrats" (big D).
If we turn it around it's more accurate (and less political) to say that liberals and Democrats would agree with day to day military justice more than they realize.
The distinction is important because liberal 'values' tend to blow with the wind. Whereas the military values of duty, honor and country remain steadfast through the generations. We have a professional fighting force that behaves professionally. Torture and abuse of prisoners is taught, accepted or tolerated.
What happened to a few illegal combatants in Gitmo (or elsewhere by the CIA) is another discussion altogether.
Anyway, I don't mean to beat up on ya but I hope the distinction is clear. You're right, no need to mention conservatives but I can tell you (as one) that the values are in sync.
Hang in there and keep up the good work!
Posted by: Max at February 12, 2008 7:13 pm
Correction:
Torture and abuse of prisoners is *NOT* taught, accepted or tolerated.
Sheesh
Posted by: Max at February 12, 2008 7:16 pm
Max,
I would prefer to say that excessive partisanship invites abusive fraud. The right in the United States has more recently and more thoroughly been cast out into the wilderness, forcing it to accept reasonable feedback. There certainly are any number of scoundrels in the US right engaged in abusive fraud, but they regularly get caught and vigorously outed. What is deeply disturbing about the US left is their willingness and ability to engage in cognitive dissonance about their frauds.
I am not going to name the left's practicing frauds in this post because the worst ones are so provocative as to derail any conversation about them. The point is about the process, and today the right looks for converts and the left looks for betrayal. The rigid lockstep one must stay in to remain accepted on the left is a disaster for their culture because it destroys cognitive acuity.
The lemmings on the left are running full speed towards the edge of the cliff over Iraq. None of them dare turn about for fear of being trampled and they will maintain solidarity all the way to the edge. One could maintain that there is some kind of courage associated with that course of action; regrettably the lasting value is integrity.
Go lemmings, go!
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 12, 2008 7:40 pm
Patrick: today the right looks for converts and the left looks for betrayal.
There are plenty of heretic-hunters on the right. Have you forgotten about McCain Derangement Syndrome? Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, etc., are all furious about McCain's mere 80 percent conservative rating.
At least the wilderness-wing of the GOP lost the primary. McCain, no doubt, is looking for converts, as is Obama.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 12, 2008 8:16 pm
If the Iraqis all love us so, why do they continue shooting at us, planting bombs, and driving VBIEDs at our forces. Answer me that, why don't you?
The place is a damned quagmire. The Sunnis and SHia still hate each other and fully intend to tear each other apart as soon as we leave. Our bayonets keep them apart, but how long can this go on?
Not much longer, hopefully; there's a change coming in Washington.....
Posted by: Carl_W_Goss at February 12, 2008 9:51 pm
Michael,
I chose not to put down the crazy witch hunters of either extreme because their actions detract from the norm.
I promise you this, if the Democratic party does not have a clear nominee by mid-March, the hysteria of the anti-McCain tantrum will appear coldly lucid compared to the behavior on the left. I hope the police in Denver are developing their riot control skills because come August, they are going to need them if this is not a done deal.
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 12, 2008 10:00 pm
Great work as usual, Michael.
There must be some way to get wider exposure for these kinds of stories. Maybe an aspiring bloggy filmmaker out there who'd want to accompany you on your next trip?
Posted by: Andrew at February 12, 2008 10:45 pm
I dont really trust any Arab media. Al Arabiya is owned by a member of the Suadi royal family, as is much of the Arab media. Asharq al Awsat, al Hayat, al Riyadh (of course), LBC, MBC are all either owned or controled by Saudis.
Having said that, I read them all. They arent really so much good for news as for getting an idea who is leaning in what direction. For the moment al Arabiya, like most other Saudi new outlets, is leaning in America's direction.
Posted by: Marc at February 13, 2008 6:18 am
Carl_W_Goss,
If the Iraqis all love us so, why do they continue shooting at us, planting bombs, and driving VBIEDs at our forces. Answer me that, why don't you?
Why does Code Pink do what it does? They are fanatics who refuse to listen to reason. Same thing over there, only generations of really crappy ordnance handling gives them a lot more high explosives to work with and their culture is more tolerant of murderous violence.
Perhaps in the future Code Pink and their supporters will return to the kind of murderous violence we saw sporadically in the US in the early 1970s, but I doubt it. Our forensics skill, the competence of Code Pink, and the unavailability of military explosives combine to make it extraordinarily unlikely that the fanatics against the war will successfully engage in a bombing campaign. I regret to say that nothing in the integrity or character of Code Pink significantly prevents them from the slippery slope of explosive violence. Culturally they may be less likely to engage in that behavior, but the utter lack of integrity and reason in their leadership makes them truly loose cannons.
You can only hug Hugo Chavez so many times before you become him.
Circling back to the central question: AQI still engages in violence because there is still money in it and they still hold sway in some areas. Most of the militias are starting to notice that the tall nail draws the hammer, especially now that the hammer is better organized and more prevalent.
As for the change coming to Washington, a sudden increase in naivety is not necessarily a desirable change. Wouldn't it be better to dream of improvements instead of just change?
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 13, 2008 8:40 am
Where I spent some time growing up we used to go out shooting in the desert. Lots of times people would dump old vehicles there which soon became part of target practice.
Those hole look like they were incoming because the metal seems to be rounded on the outside, not the ragged edges of metal from an exit hole. It is hard to tell because the picture is not configured to enlarge when you click it.
So I doubt the shots came from the interior of the vehicle. If they did I feel sorry for the people in the truck. I remember coming home once from shooting as a teenager and a person who came with is accidently discharged a Tech 9 through the floor board of the vehicle. I think we all almost lost our hearing.
I was told Tech 9s have a feature where the gun can have a round chambered and with the safety on, you can pull the trigger to release the pressure on the firing pin. It is supposed to do this without discharging, problem is it didnt always work right.
Posted by: Marc at February 13, 2008 9:47 am
Marc: I was told Tech 9s have a feature where the gun can have a round chambered and with the safety on, you can pull the trigger to release the pressure on the firing pin.
Wow, I would never use a feature like that. I wouldn't even buy a gun that had a feature like that because I wouldn't want to be tempted.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 13, 2008 10:04 am
Michael,
Nor would I. I shot the Tech 9 and Tech 22 a few times and was not impressed at all.
I was always taught to the leave a firearm unchambered with the safety on. I dont think there is ever a situation where you couldnt chamber a round quick enough to get a shot off when you needed to.
When I was younger I did competitive shooting. My coach used to say that "it is 'unloaded weapons' that kill hundreds of people every year". It is true.
I had one such friend at High School who was in the N-JROTC unit I was in. He was on the drill team and was doing the "manual of arms" on a rifle he thought was unloaded. Unfortunately it was loaded and when he tapped the butt against the ground it discharged and entered below his chin and excited out the top of his head.
Every weapon should be treated as if it is ready to fire.
Posted by: Marc at February 13, 2008 10:35 am
Michael, I think you're mistaken in comparing the Bush Derangement Syndrome to the conservative attacks on McCain. The conservatives are mad at McCain on a policy level. He was wrong on Campaign Finance Reform, the gang of 14 coalition and the biggest one was amnesty for illegals.
Bush Derangement Syndrome is for real. You've heard it before: "It's Bush's illegal war. He lied about the intelligence. Bush invaded Iraq in retaliation for the assassination attempt on his father. Bush knew about 9/11. Bush brought down the towers. Bush is a fascist. Bush is Hitler. Bush hates black people. Bush eats babies alive. blah...blah...blah....
Sorry no comparison.
Posted by: PeteDawg at February 13, 2008 10:42 am
Pete: The conservatives are mad at McCain on a policy level.
Some, yes. Others, no. I've seen much crazier comments than those about policy. Please don't make me dig them up...
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 13, 2008 11:14 am
Now, Michael I can say with 100% assurance that Limbaugh and Hannity haven't attacked McCain on a personal level. Now in regards to Ann Coulter (She's known to go off the deep end.) and etc. etc. I'm not so sure, but I'd wholeheartedly codemn and disagree with them if they did.
So find me quotes so I can condemn...;P
Posted by: PeteDawg at February 13, 2008 11:38 am
I been listening to Limbaugh yesterday.
He was talking about not endorsing McCain because his endorsment might scare off some Independents and centrist Democrats.
It sounds like RL bit his lip and went with 'lesser of two evels'.
Posted by: leo at February 13, 2008 12:05 pm
By the way Michael, have you ever visited the site of Colonel Patrick Lang? He is a retired senior Army intelligence officer, member of the Green Berets. He was a DoD SES and was the first Arabic instructor at West Point. He worked with the DIA as an IO for the Middle East.
I have a lot of respect for the man and he has a lot of insight to offer. You ought to check it out if you havent:
http://www.turcopolier.typepad.com/
Posted by: Marc at February 13, 2008 1:03 pm
"Relentless media coverage of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib
Posted by: phil at February 13, 2008 2:21 pm
Hersh offers reliable EVIDENCE? LMAO
-
Posted by: deesine at February 13, 2008 3:13 pm
Can you offer proof that Gen. Taguba is a liar?
Posted by: phil at February 13, 2008 4:10 pm
That's not how it works, Phil. The burden of proof is on the party making the assertion.
Where does Gen. Taguba say Rumsfeld knew about it? I skimmed the article, and all I got out of it is that Sy Hersh wants to make it look like Rumsfeld should have known. Maybe he should have known, but that's a very different thing than showing that he knew.
Did I miss it?
Posted by: rosignol at February 13, 2008 4:25 pm
Dear Michael Totten,
I remember a long time ago you wrote an article for the WSJ complaining about how your fellow liberals don't care about history. Since then you've gone on to join the right-of-center Pajaamas Media, the neocon Commentary, and now have resorted to using the term liberal in quotation marks. Your readership seems to be majority Republican.
In what way are you still a liberal?
Posted by: earlsofsandwich at February 13, 2008 10:51 pm
earlsofsandwich,
Michael writes for the people who offer him money. When he cannot agree with the editor on the content of what he writes, he withdraws his articles. Michael's articles are invariably factually based and honestly researched.
That liberal publications aren't routinely offering Michael Totten work is not Michael's fault. The problem is that Michael refuses to tailor his facts to meet a pre-arranged agenda. That left of center publications do not value that kind of integrity is not an indictment on Michael Totten's politics.
Take a moment and reflect on the fact that Michael cannot find paying work for quality product in left of center publications. Think about what that says regarding the material you are reading from the sources you are comfortable with.
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 13, 2008 11:14 pm
My work has appeared in left-of-center publications, just less often. Earlier today I submitted an editor-solicited article to the biggest left-of-center publication in the United States.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 14, 2008 12:46 am
If the Big MSM (NYT?) publishes your stuff, that would indeed be a great Valentine's day gift (even if not for a while does it see print).
Patrick's point is well taken, there's no excuse for not having such excellence in print. I even think Roger Simon should try to get a "Best of PJ Media" weekly out, to start competing -- but I can understand the shyness of any investors into dead tree publishing.
Carl does make a common Leftist pseudo-truth: "If the Iraqis all love us..." but of course, nobody claims they ALL do, nor even that those Iraqis who are positive for America can be said to love America.
Here's a logical truth "If false then false (or true) (it doesn't matter)" > if not B than not A (contrapositive) yada yada.
Carl and Leftists are silly, not serious, if they expect ALL Iraqis to love America. Heck, a good third of Americans don't love the real America, the one that elected Bush.
The Liberal Fascists who demand lock-step "unity" for the particular fad of the year don't read Michael because he reports what he sees. He also, often, expresses opinions and evaluations, which so far seem fully substantiated by the reality he's reporting.
Of course, when it comes to pro-abortion, Michael & I disagree strongly -- yet I'd guess far more pro-life folk read the blog here than pro-Obama. Tho I wish I was wrong.
Posted by: Tom Grey - Liberty Dad at February 14, 2008 10:40 am
Michael,
That publication previously got its ass repeatedly and thoroughly kicked for its editorial position, although they have one of the best reporters ever.
You should brace yourself for some ugly hate mail if they publish your article. I know you tried to be neutral and they didn't give you enough rope to actually hang yourself, but that publication reaches a lot of people who have EDS. (Everything Derangement Syndrome)
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 14, 2008 11:03 am
Tom Grey,
One I actually don't think would have happened so well had Shinseki's 300 000 boots on the ground occupied Iraq and accepted the responsibility for stopping all crime.
I am constantly amazed how people who've never had command of a squad can blithely assume the ease of commanding a multiple-army force. Adding bodies does not mean adding effectiveness. We had strategic flaws in our doctrine in 2003 because our planners were not omniscient. Having more people to execute strategic flaws does not make for success.
Requiring all planners be the Archangel Michael before we commit to battle is the alternative to going forward with flawed doctrine. (Sorry, I just had a mental picture of what Archangel Candidate School looked like..."You call that halo glowing, maggot?")
We acted, observed, oriented, decided, and acted again. It took too bloody long to change our orientation, but I can hardly see how adding encumbrance would improve that situation.
Thank God we have block unit rotation in place so we could re-orient away from battle and shift posture without telegraphing onsite. Can you imagine trying to change with the individual replacement process they had in Vietnam?
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 14, 2008 11:19 am
Carl- You're kidding, right???? "If the Iraqis love us so much? Why do they...(fill in blank).
Let's try this with the Leftist/Liberals/Democrats in America?
If the Liberals love everybody, why do they hate conservatives so much?
If the Liberals love to say we need allies to defeat terrorism, why are they so eager to throw the Iraqis overboard?
If the Liberals love free speech so much, why do they try censor conservatives from giving speeches on college campuses? Why do they want to bring back the Fairness Doctrine?
If the Liberals love Affirmative Action, why doesn't the rich white woman (Hillary Clinton) just move over so the poor black guy (Obama) can be the Democrat nominee?
If the Liberals hate fascism, why do they love Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and hate George Bush?
If the Liberals love the troops, why were the Marines called unwanted intruders in Berkeley?
We as Americans can't even get united when comes to defending America and defeating terrorism? And you want a country like Iraq that has had 20+ years of fascism to be united. Give me a break...
Posted by: PeteDawg at February 14, 2008 11:49 am
Patrick: You should brace yourself for some ugly hate mail if they publish your article.
I will not get any hate mail. It's a book review, and it's short. The book was written by a liberal journalist named Sandra Mackey, and I gave her a very positive review. Her book is excellent and nearly devoid of factual errors. She has no partisan or ideological axe to grind, and she knows her subject (Lebanon) very well indeed. She's a straightforward writer and I gave her a straightforward positive review.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 14, 2008 12:34 pm
Well the bullet holes in the truck conversation sparked my interest enough to dig up a picture I have of a different IP truck, also from Fallujah.
Lo and behold: My picture shows a blue armor plate, bolted to the door with three bolts, evenly spaced and in line with the letters "LS" on the door. The two holes closer to each other are also from bolts, it appears, albeit smaller ones. Crazy. If I knew how to attach the photo, I would. Good work, Michael, on the article as well as the hypothesis.
Someone's been watching too much CSI...
Posted by: PDK at February 14, 2008 1:02 pm
IP truck/PDK
The Iraqi police are trashing the trucks as well. In the photo - the passenger side quarter panel has a crease left from an over extended door. Someone left the door open and then backed the car up, when doing so the door probably caught a bollard or post and hyper extended the door/hinges leaving the crease on the Q panel.
Field fix for that involves shoving a 2x4 into the door jam and slamming the door shut.. someone did this to get the door un-tweaked but now (upon zoomed in inspection) the door hangs slightly downward and ajar. ;P
Posted by: 13times at February 14, 2008 2:16 pm
Michael,
Your blog was just passed on to me about a week or two ago.
I am now passing it on to anyone who will listen and everyone that cares.
You have a gift. You get it better than most and articulate what so many of us never could. Thank you.
Joel M. Wood
SGT/USMC 0321
Posted by: JWood at February 14, 2008 10:30 pm
Michael,
They won't give you hate mail for what you wrote, but when they look you up EDS will kick in because you do not toe the line.
Care to wager? JW Gold for me if I'm right, an equivalently priced red for you if I'm wrong?
Posted by: Patrick S Lasswell at February 14, 2008 11:56 pm
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in a blog post From the Front 02/15/2008 Due to lax posting this week I
Posted by: David M at February 15, 2008 10:34 am
Post a comment

Winner, The 2008 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Winner, The 2007 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Read my blog on Kindle









Sponsored Links

Buy a used boat

Shanghai Hotels

Yachts for sale


Recommended Reading